Swipe to navigate through the articles of this issue
In general, politicians involved in scandals of various natures are punished by voters. Good-looking politicians, on the contrary, are rewarded by voters. Almost fifty years of empirical research has shown that ill-informed voters will use the physical attractiveness of candidates, as well as readily-available information on scandal allegations involving candidates running for office, as a heuristic shortcut to determine their voting behaviour. This article represents the first attempt to link the existing literature on the electoral effects of scandals with the existing literature of the electoral impact of candidate attractiveness. Using data on U.S. House of Representatives elections between 1972 and 2012, we find that candidate attractiveness mitigates the negative electoral effects of involvement in scandal; this implies that attractive politicians do get a “break” when involved in scandals. Of all type of scandals, we also find that candidate attractiveness has the largest moderating role if the incumbent is embroiled in a sex scandal.
Please log in to get access to this content
To get access to this content you need the following product:
Abramowitz, A. I. (1991). Incumbency, campaign spending, and the decline of competition in US House elections. The Journal of Politics, 53(1), 34–56.
Antonakis, J., & Dalgas, O. (2009). Predicting elections: Child’s play! Science, 323(5918), 1183.
Banducci, S. A., Karp, J. A., Thrasher, M., & Rallings, C. (2008). Ballot photographs as cues in low-information elections. Political Psychology, 29(6), 903–917.
Barone, M., Ujifusa, G., & Matthews, D. (1975). Almanac of American politics, 1976: Dutton.
Basinger, S. J. (2013). Scandals and congressional elections in the post-Watergate era. Political Research Quarterly, 66(2), 385–398.
Basinger, S. J. (2016). Scandals and Ethics Reform in the US House of Representatives. Public Integrity, 18(4), 359–375.
Basinger, S. J., Brown, L., Harris, D. B., & Gulati, G. (2014). Counting and classifying congressional scandals. In A. Dagnes & M. Sachleben (Eds.), Scandal! an interdisciplinary approach to the consequences, outcomes, and significance of political scandals (pp. 3–28). New York: Bloomsbury Press.
Berggren, N., Jordahl, H., & Poutvaara, P. (2010). The looks of a winner: Beauty and electoral success. Journal of Public Economics, 94(1), 8–15.
Berggren, N., Jordahl, H., & Poutvaara, P. (2017). The right look: Conservative politicians look better and voters reward it. Journal of Public Economics, 146, 79–86.
Brusattin, L. (2011). Candidate visual appearance as a shortcut for both sophisticated and unsophisticated voters: Evidence from a Spanish online study. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(1), 1–20.
Cox, G. W., & Katz, J. N. (1996). Why did the incumbency advantage in US House elections grow? American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111633.
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(3), 285.
Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., & Miller, M. G. (2011). Are financial or moral scandals worse? It depends. PS. Political Science & Politics, 44(04), 749–757.
Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., & Miller, M. G. (2014). Does time heal all wounds? Sex scandals, tax evasion, and the passage of time. PS. Political Science & Politics, 47(02), 357–366.
Druckman, J. N. (2003). The Power of television images: The first Kennedy-Nixon debate revisited. Journal of Politics, 65(2), 559–571.
Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 109.
Efrain, M. G., & Patterson, E. (1974). Voters vote beautiful: The effect of physical appearance on a national election. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 6(4), 352.
Fraile, M. (2013). Do information-rich contexts reduce knowledge inequalities? The contextual determinants of political knowledge in Europe. Acta Politica, 48(2), 119–143.
Funk, C. L. (1996). The impact of scandal on candidate evaluations: An experimental test of the role of candidate traits. Political Behavior, 18(1), 1–24.
Galston, W. A. (2001). Political knowledge, political engagement, and civic education. Annual Review of Political Science, 4(1), 217–234.
Galvis, Á. F., Snyder, J. M., Jr., & Song, B. (2016). Newspaper market structure and behavior: Partisan coverage of political scandals in the United States from 1870 to 1910. The Journal of Politics, 78(2), 368–381.
Gelman, A., & King, G. (1990). Estimating incumbency advantage without bias. American Journal of Political Science, 34(4), 1142–1164.
Gershman, B. L. (1982). Abscam, the judiciary, and the ethics of entrapment. The Yale Law Journal, 91(8), 1565–1591.
Graycar, A. (2015). Corruption: classification and analysis. Policy and Society, 34(2), 87–96.
Hart, W., Ottati, V. C., & Krumdick, N. D. (2011). Physical attractiveness and candidate evaluation: A model of correction. Political Psychology, 32(2), 181–203.
Herrick, R. (2000). Who will survive? An exploration of factors contributing to the removal of unethical house members. American Politics Quarterly, 28(1), 96–109.
Jacobson, G. C., & Dimock, M. A. (1994). Checking out: The effects of bank overdrafts on the 1992 house elections. American Journal of Political Science, 38(3), 601–624.
Leigh, A., & Susilo, T. (2009). Is voting skin-deep? Estimating the effect of candidate ballot photographs on election outcomes. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(1), 61–70.
Lenz, G. S., & Lawson, C. (2011). Looking the part: Television leads less informed citizens to vote based on candidates’ appearance. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 574–589.
McAllister, I. (1998). Civic education and political knowledge in Australia. Australian Journal of Political Science, 33(1), 7–23.
Milazzo, C., & Mattes, K. (2016). Looking good for election day: Does attractiveness predict electoral success in Britain? The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 18(1), 161–178.
Olivola, C. Y., & Todorov, A. (2010a). Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearance-based trait inferences and voting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34(2), 83–110.
Olivola, C. Y., & Todorov, A. (2010b). Fooled by first impressions? Reexamining the diagnostic value of appearance-based inferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 315–324.
Pattie, C., & Johnston, R. (2012). The electoral impact of the UK 2009 MPs’ expenses scandal. Political Studies, 60(4), 730–750.
Peters, J. G., & Welch, S. (1978). Political corruption in America: a search for definitions and a theory, or if political corruption is in the mainstream of American politics why is it not in the mainstream of American politics research? American Political Science Review, 72(03), 974–984. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955115.
Praino, R., & Graycar, A. (2017). Does Corruption Follow Opportunity? A Study of the US Congress. Public Integrity, 1–19. Advanced Online Publication, https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2017.1402169.
Praino, R., & Stockemer, D. (2012a). Tempus Edax Rerum: Measuring the incumbency advantage in the US House of Representatives. The Social Science Journal, 49(3), 270–274.
Praino, R., & Stockemer, D. (2012b). Tempus Fugit, Incumbency Stays: Measuring the Incumbency Advantage in the U.S. Senate. Congress & the Presidency, 39(2), 160–176.
Praino, R., Stockemer, D., & Moscardelli, V. G. (2013). The lingering effect of scandals in Congressional elections: incumbents, challengers, and voters. Social Science Quarterly, 94(4), 1045–1061. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12046.
Praino, R., Stockemer, D., & Ratis, J. (2014). Looking good or looking competent? Physical appearance and electoral success in the 2008 congressional elections. American Politics Research, 42(6), 1096–1117.
Puglisi, R., & Snyder, J. M. (2011). Newspaper coverage of political scandals. The Journal of Politics, 73(3), 931–950.
Rosar, U., Klein, M., & Beckers, T. (2008). The frog pond beauty contest: Physical attractiveness and electoral success of the constituency candidates at the North Rhine-Westphalia state election of 2005. European Journal of Political Research, 47(1), 64–79.
Rosar, U., Klein, M., & Beckers, T. (2012). Magic Mayors: Predicting Electoral Success from Candidates’ Physical Attractiveness under the Conditions of a Presidential Electoral System. German Politics, 21(4), 372–391.
Sartori, G. (1970). Concept misformation in comparative politics. American Political Science Review, 64(4), 1033–1053.
Stern, M. (2007). The Wrong Stuff: The Extraordinary Saga of Randy Duke Cunningham, the Most Corrupt Congressman Ever Caught: PublicAffairs.
Stockemer, D., & Praino, R. (2015). Blinded by Beauty? Physical Attractiveness and Candidate Selection in the US House of Representatives. Social Science Quarterly, 96(2), 430–443.
Stockemer, D., & Praino, R. (2017). Physical attractiveness, voter heuristics and electoral systems: The role of candidate attractiveness under different institutional designs. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(2), 336–352.
Stone, P. H. (2006). Heist: Superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, his Republican allies, and the buying of Washington: Macmillan.
Thompson, J. B. (2013). Political scandal: Power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Wiley.
Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A. N., Goren, A., & Hall, C. C. (2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308(5728), 1623–1626.
Todorov, A., Pakrashi, M., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2009). Evaluating faces on trustworthiness after minimal time exposure. Social Cognition, 27(6), 813–833.
Vancil, D. L., & Pendell, S. D. (1987). The myth of viewer-listener disagreement in the first Kennedy-Nixon debate. Central States Speech Journal, 38(1), 16–27.
Watkins, L. M., & Johnston, L. (2000). Screening job applicants: The impact of physical attractiveness and application quality. International Journal of selection and assessment, 8(2), 76–84.
Welch, S., & Hibbing, J. R. (1997). The effects of charges of corruption on voting behavior in congressional elections, 1982–1990. The Journal of Politics, 59(01), 226–239. https://doi.org/10.2307/2998224.
Winkielman, P., Halberstadt, J., Fazendeiro, T., & Catty, S. (2006). Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological Science, 17(9), 799–806.
- The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Do Attractive Politicians Get a ‘Break’ When They are Involved in Scandals?
- Publication date
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta